The new model of dark matter reactivity hopefully can provide sufficie

Question

Project SC Butler: Day 202: Sentence Correction (SC1) 
 For SC butler Questions  Click Here

The new model of dark matter reactivity  hopefully can provide sufficient evidence, this will put  to rest the age-old debate on the existence of antimatter.

A) hopefully can provide sufficient evidence, this will put

B) it is hoped, can provide sufficient evidence that will put

C) can, it is hoped, provide sufficient evidence to put

D) hopefully will put

E) hopes to put

generis · Accepted Answer

OFFICIAL EXPLANATION

Project SC Butler: Day 202: Sentence Correction (SC1)

• it is hoped

GMAC does not like the way that most people use word "hopefully."
 
 And the issue is tested . I know that experts have said that GMAC does not test the issue.
That information is out of date. 
The Advanced Questions published in September of 2019 contained one question in which "hopefully" and "it is hoped" were tested.
That question is  herel .
A better and recent question is listed in Notes, below.
I can think of two more such quesitons, and I suspect that there are more than those four.

• hopefully, hopefully, it is hoped

--  Hopefully  is an adverb, this way: He  looked hopefully  towards the horizon, waiting for sunrise. 
--  Hopeful  is the adjective.  The hopeful  sailors scanned the horizon for land.
In this question, who or what is doing something "hopefully" (is doing something in a hopeful manner)? 
No one and nothing.
Models of dark matter do not display hopefully behavior.

Hopefully  cannot modify a whole clause.
 Wrong : Hopefully, the weather will be sunny for the picnic tomorrow.
→ The weather cannot feel hopeful, be hopeful, or behave hopefully.
 Wrong : Hopefully, you can follow instructions.
Correct: I hope that you can follow instructions.

Finally, we use "it is hoped" to (1) replace "hopefully" in its correct usage, usage that
(2) usually means "I hope that" or "we hope that." 
English speakers have a really hard time with this guideline.
They want the "hopefully" to be part of the general atmosphere: fine. Use "it is hoped."
-- you can call the "it" a dummy pronoun or a pronoun with a delayed antecedent
-- I don't see the point in the latter. The word IT is a placeholder. The end.

Although "hopefully" is okay in informal conversation and according to some grammarians,
the GMAT does not like  hopefully  unless it is attached to  a person doing something with hope. 
(I do not think I have ever seen an official question with "hopefully" in the correct answer.) 
Use "it is hoped," ften placed in the middle of a sentence and set off by commas.

• watch for comma splices, poor construction, and removal of essential information

THE PROMPT  
 The new model of dark matter reactivity  hopefully can provide sufficient evidence, this will put  to rest the age-old debate on the existence of antimatter.

THE OPTIONS

• Two independent clauses must be joined with comma + conjunction. No conjunction exists. The two ICs are "stuck" together improperly.
This incorrect construction is called a "comma splice" or "run-on sentence."
• What, exactly is "hopefully" providing sufficient evidence for XYZ? 
The new model of dark matter? No. A model of dark matter does not behave  hopefully .
Eliminate A

• The clause  it is hoped  should be either separated with commas (as in answer C) or connected with an appropriate conjunction. 
Eliminate B

• it is hoped is correctly set off by commas
• this construction "splits the verb." I talk about this (allowed) splitting in  this post,   here . 
KEEP
 
• the model of dark matter did not do anything hopefully. 
The model is inanimate. 
• what happened to "suffcient evidence"? 
Eliminate D

• A model of dark matter does not itself hope to do anything.
• What happened to sufficient evidence? I ask not because A determined original meaning.
(A) does not determine original meaning. 
But we do have three options that include extra information that seems very essential in context. 
Eliminate E.

The correct answer is (C).

• NOTES

The official question on which this is based—in which the word "hopefully" is tested as of September 2019—is  here .
The official question is good.

In my response, you will read about some layers of  rhetorical construction. 
The question is interesting.
The prose in that question is good.

Doer01  , well done! Thank you for taking the time to research the issue.

I think that when Mike McGarry wrote that post, he had not seen the question to which I linked. The question was republished in September 2019 in the Advanced Guide.
There are at least two other official questions that test this issue. 
 
  • This phrase is common in academic English:   will, it is hoped, VERB

The construction looks strange to many.
If you read enough stuffy or scientific literature, the phrase does not seem strange. (Guilty as charged.)
(Other phrases that split verbs in formal prose include  on occasion, in theory,  and  in reality . )

Such splitting is allowed and often used to add particular emphasis or to avoid strange phrasing.
 this post,   here .

This example comes from the  New York Times  
  specially trained ground controllers will, it is hoped, speed up the flow of traffic from New York on routes to the Middle West. 
“A Plan to Unlock the Great Grid in the Skies.” New York Times. 31 March 1985. (1985) Available at  this address.  Accessed Dec 10 2019.

COMMENTS

Camach700  . welcome to SC Butler.

globaldesi  , as I wrote above, option D 
(1) gets "hopefully" wrong, as  zhanbo  helpfully affirmed,
and 
(2) Options D and E removes information that is essential. We can tell that the information is essential both by comparing D and E to the other three options.
THe essential/nonessential distinction still holds for now: 
OG 2020 includes a question (SC# 824) in which essential vs. non-essential information is tested explicitly. .

The usage of  hopefully  is not a matter of idiom.
 Hopefully  is an  adverb. 
A living, sentient being can do something hopefully.

---- 
When I peeked earlier, only the first three people had posted --  eakabuah  ,  Camach700  , and  Doer01  - very well done.

Kudos go to all good explanations—which, at last count, was all of you.

eakabuah · Answer

The new model of dark matter reactivity hopefully can provide sufficient evidence, this will put to rest the age-old debate on the existence of antimatter.

Meaning: The new model of dark matter reactivity can, it is hoped, provide sufficient evidence to put to rest the age-old debate on the existence of antimatter.

We can easily eliminate A for joining two main clauses with just a comma to create a run-on sentence.
On the grounds of meaning, will is not appropriate in the context of this sentence. Apart from expressing that something will happen in the future based on certain conditions, will also express certainty. Meanwhile hopefully also expresses hope amidst some level of doubt pertaining to the occurrence of some event. Can is more appropriate when some level of doubt exists within the context of the sentence. Hence, hopefully works better with can than will agrees with hopefully. Based on this I can eliminate D.
On the same grounds of meaning, it doesn't make much sense to say that Dark matter hopes to put to rest the age-old debate. Does dark matter has what it takes to hope? Or is it that someone hopes that dark can[probably] provide sufficient evidence to put to rest the age-old debate on the existence of antimatter. For this illogical meaning, E can be eliminated.

In B we have dark matter can provide sufficient evidence that will put to rest the age-old debate. Already, can provide expresses some level of uncertainty. Something that is uncertain cannot form the basis for making categoric claims that evidence will put to rest the age-old debate. The infinitive form to put rather than will put as in C is better and sensical. With the infinitive, we can say that dark matter can provide sufficient evidence [in order or with the purpose] to put to rest the age-old debate. Eliminate B.

Now I'm left with option C. I hope my analysis has not taken a wrong turn to the North Pole; since we are in the season of Christmas

.

A) The new model of dark matter reactivity hopefully can provide sufficient evidence, this will put to rest the age-old debate on the existence of antimatter.

B) The new model of dark matter reactivity, it is hoped, can provide sufficient evidence that will put to rest the age-old debate on the existence of antimatter.

C) The new model of dark matter reactivity can, it is hoped, provide sufficient evidence to put to rest the age-old debate on the existence of antimatter.

D) The new model of dark matter reactivity hopefully will put to rest the age-old debate on the existence of antimatter.

E) The new model of dark matter reactivity hopes to put to rest the age-old debate on the existence of antimatter.

. A) The new model of dark matter reactivity hopefully can provide sufficient evidence , this will put to rest the age-old debate on the existence of antimatter. B) The new model of dark matter reactivity, it is hoped, can provide sufficient evidence that will put to rest the age-old debate on the existence of antimatter. C) The new model of dark matter reactivity can, it is hoped, provide sufficient evidence to put to rest the age-old debate on the existence of antimatter. D) The new model of dark matter reactivity hopefully will put to rest the age-old debate on the existence of antimatter. E) The new model of dark matter reactivity hopes to put to rest the age-old debate on the existence of antimatter.

Camach700 · Answer

#First split_  meaning  --> D & E out as they omit to claim that the model can provide sufficient evidence; this is a core element for the original meaning of the sentence.

#Second split_  redundancy  --> A is out as "hopefully" and "can" express the same meaning of  possibility

B and C remain --> In B the pronoun "it" is used incorrectly. Put where it is, it conveys ambiguity in the sentence. On the other hand, in C it is correctly used as  non essential modifier  with the meaning that the community hopes that the new model can provide sufficient evidence.

IMO C

Doer01 · Answer

Hi, IMO C. First, the use of "hopefully" is very arguable on GMAT. Here is an explanation by Mike from Magoosh. https://gmatclub.com/forum/hopefully-159341.html Now, only living can hope for something. Hence, new model cannot. This takes care of A,D & E. Out of B & C, latter uses the correct construction by putting hope in a non-essential modifier, making it the correct choice.

Shishou · Answer

The new model of dark matter reactivity hopefully can provide sufficient evidence, this will put to rest the age-old debate on the existence of antimatter.

A) hopefully can provide sufficient evidence, this will put
 a few issues .First, demonstrative pronouns such as "this" can not be used on their own.They need to be attached to their referent noun or used to create copies of a referent.It also seems we have a comma splice here.The sentence runs on,leaving the meaning mangled

B) it is hoped, can provide sufficient evidence that will put
  This sentence reads awkwardly

C) can, it is hoped, provide sufficient evidence to put
 This is the right answer.it avoids all the meaning,construction and pronoun errors

D) hopefully will put
  its the evidence that will put to rest the debate not the model itself

E) hopes to put
 Once again, its the evidence that should put to rest the debate

Answer is C

zhanbo · Answer

It took me 1 minute and 19 seconds to choose  (C) .

(A) Comma splice.
(B) there must be a comma before "it is hoped".
(C) There is still debate on the use of "hopefully" as "it is hoped". The acceptance rate is higher and higher, but GMAT does not like such usage. Thus, C correctly uses "it is hoped" to express the intended meaning. 
(D) See above.
(E) This one is the shortest, but I feel that only people can hope.

globaldesi · Answer

Is D incorrect just because of usage of word hopefully or it does have run on issue too?

Posted from my mobile device

zhanbo · Answer

D is not a run-on sentence. This version has just one subject (The new model) and one verb (Put to rest). D is grammatically sound.

exc4libur · Answer

MEANING: The new model can provide sufficient evidence to put to rest the age-old debate.

A) "the model can provide evidence, this will put" fragment;
B) "can provide…that will put" the first item "can" presents a possibility, but the second "will" presents a certainty, this is inconsistent and unintended;
D) "the model hopefully will put to rest" this imps the model itself will, certainly, put to rest the debate, not the evidence it generates, unintended;
E) same as (D).

Ans (C)

generis · Answer

The official explanation is  HERE

basecamper09 · Answer

Funny thing- once we know the answer (OA) we can come up with any damn reason to justify the OA. Though the analysis is right, it always fails to occur to me if that kind of thinking is possible in the examination scenario. Looking at the question, the OA and then piecing together some reason, is good but I am not sure if it works, in reality.

VerbalBot · Answer

Automated notice from GMAT Club VerbalBot: 

A member just gave Kudos to this thread, showing it’s still useful. I’ve bumped it to the top so more people can benefit. Feel free to add your own questions or solutions.

 This post was generated automatically.

The new model of dark matter reactivity hopefully can provide sufficie

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Sentence Correction (SC - EA only) Questions

The new model of dark matter reactivity hopefully can provide sufficie

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards